ARTICLE pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
“Careers in Chemistry”: A Course Providing Students with Real-World Foundations Danielle M. Solano,† Fred E. Wood,‡ and Mark J. Kurth*,‡ † ‡
Department of Chemistry, California State University—Bakersfield, Bakersfield, California 93311, United States Department of Chemistry, University of California, Davis, California 95616, United States
bS Supporting Information ABSTRACT: A course entitled “Careers in Chemistry” has been developed and implemented in the chemistry curriculum. This seminar-style class exposes students to a full spectrum of career options available to chemists by hosting outside speakers. The workings and logistics of this course and its positive impact on students are described. Survey results suggest that implementation of a similar course or seminar series at other institutions may be beneficial in exposing students to career options in chemistry. KEYWORDS: Graduate Education/Research, Upper-Division Undergraduate, Curriculum, Applications of Chemistry, Professional Development, Student/Career Counseling
S
tudents typically have limited access to professional chemists (other than their professors) and, as a result, many view a chemistry degree as leading to only two possible career paths: academia or industry. This inaccurate perception fails to distinguish the many distinct positions within academia and industry and, further, overlooks other career categories open to chemists. To improve student understanding of the full spectrum of job options for chemists, the “Careers in Chemistry” (CIC) course has been developed, a commingled undergraduate and graduate student course offered in the fall quarter each year. CIC exposes students to working chemists representing different professions and provides the students with a broader picture of the wide variety of career options that are available. Lent and co-workers have described the positive effect of such a “focused interest” career course for college students in science and engineering.1 A variety of career-related courses have been developed for students in chemistry and chemical engineering; however, their content and goals differ significantly from CIC.2 9 Two articles described courses designed for graduate students.2,3 Other articles reported courses specifically for undergraduate students addressing professional development,4 6 attraction and retention of chemistry-major students,7,8 and training for careers in industry.9 In fact, only one program that is similar to CIC has been reported for chemistry students,10 and its effectiveness was not evaluated. In this article, the workings and logistics of CIC and its positive impact on students are described.
once, whereas graduate students may take the course multiple times. Further, the speakers are publicized to the chemistry department, so that faculty and students not enrolled in the course may attend talks according to personal interest. Undergraduate students are not necessarily committed to an advanced degree, but because the majority of the attendees are graduate students, most of the speakers invited have advanced degrees. This approach has the added advantage of encouraging undergraduate students to pursue advanced degrees in chemistry. The course meets once a week for 1 h and 50 min. During the class, the speaker gives two separate 40 50 min presentations. The first is a science talk where the guest speaker discusses his or her research in a manner similar to a seminar presentation. A short networking break that allows students to meet and chat with the speaker follows. The second presentation is a career talk that focuses on the speaker’s particular job, including perhaps his or her personal journey, how to find a similar position and employment, and a snapshot of the speaker’s professional day. This two-talk format is designed to provide a context for the career information and a framework for career insights. The course is graded on a pass fail basis. Passing students must attend all 10 of the seminars as well as one small-group meeting with a speaker of their choice. No other assignments are required. In the small-group meetings, 4 10 students meet with the speaker for 30 min. Students can waive this requirement if they have conflicting classes. However, by providing meeting time options during different time blocks each week, these conflicts can be minimized. The objective of the small-group meeting is to provide students with an opportunity to network with the speaker, ask individual questions, and break the
’ CIC COURSE DESCRIPTION AND LOGISTICS CIC is a one-unit elective course offered in the fall quarter of each year to undergraduate students with upper-level standing and to all graduate students. The course typically enrolls over 70 students. Undergraduate students may only take CIC for credit Copyright r 2011 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
Published: July 15, 2011 1376
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed1001366 | J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1376–1379
Journal of Chemical Education
ARTICLE
Table 1. Topics for the 2009 and 2010 CIC Courses Year(s) 2009 and 2010
Topic University Professor
2009
Intellectual Property
2009 and 2010
Professor at a Primarily Undergraduate Institution
2009 and 2010
Working for a National Lab
2009 and 2010
Developing New Research Instruments
2009
Science and Activism
2009 and 2010
Careers in Big Pharma
2009 2009
Scientist, Marketer, Manager, “Innovationist” Chemistry to Politics
2009 and 2010
Chemist and Entrepreneur
2010
Consultant
2010
Research and Development
2010
Forensic Chemistry
2010
Agricultural Chemistry
“fear-factor” barriers many students have when contemplating such interactions.
’ CIC COURSE SPEAKERS The types of topics covered in the 2009 and 2010 courses are listed in Table 1. As evidenced with this list, a CIC offering includes the typical career paths (e.g., industry and academia) as well as a variety of more unique career options. It is impossible to present all possible careers in chemistry in a single 10 week quarter; the ACS Careers Web site 11 lists more than 30. However, speakers should be selected broadly from the various subdisciplines of chemistry as well as from a variety of sectors. Often, speakers are former graduates of the university or have direct ties to faculty in the chemistry department. During their CIC visit, speakers meet with students from the course (scheduled small-group meetings) as well as with individual faculty members. For the majority of speakers, their company or employer is willing to cover their travel expenses. The chemistry department covers the local expenses for each speaker as part of the seminar budget. The seminar budget also allows for coverage of the full travel expenses of one speaker, which is typically applied to a professor from a primarily undergraduate institution (usually from in-state to minimize costs). ’ CHALLENGES OF BEING A CIC INSTRUCTOR Since the course’s inception, there have been many challenges with administering CIC. One such challenge has been to prepare speakers for the diverse audience. Attendees to the research talk range from upper-level undergraduate students to tenured faculty. Thus, the audience for CIC is quite varied in terms of educational background as well as areas of interest. Inviting “not previously met” speakers that can accommodate these challenges can be difficult. Finding speakers connected to the department acts as a “screen” and these speakers are more likely to be successful. Additionally, it is necessary to stress to students the importance of their role in CIC. Though some students have a solid grasp of this concept, others clearly do not. Past speakers have commented that, though many students are actively listening and participating, others appear to be distracted or multitasking during their talks. For this reason, the first speaker each year is
often a professor from this chemistry department. This provides an opportunity to explain to students the importance of their active participation in the course. Additionally, it is critical to emphasize to students that they are representing both the university and the chemistry department when they interact with an invited speaker. It is anticipated that this article will assist in addressing some of the course challenges. For the past two years, invited speakers have been provided with a copy of this emerging document to provide them with a better understanding of the CIC environment and the goals of the course. Each speaker reported that this document helped him or her gather a better understanding of the CIC course. In the future, students will be asked to read this article prior to the first class session so they will be prepared to get the most out of the course.
’ STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Feedback from students regarding the impact of CIC was obtained through their voluntary participation in a survey at the end of the course.12 Students were asked to respond to a number of questions, several of which allowed for comments. Out of the 152 students in the 2009 and 2010 classes, 134 students participated in the survey (88.2% response rate). Of those students, 67.2% were graduate students (1.6% master’s students, and 65.6% Ph.D. students). All undergraduate students were upper-level students (a course requirement), and the majority of graduate students (97.6%) were in their first year.13 Students were asked to respond with their level of agreement to a number of statements based on their perspectives before taking CIC. They were then asked to respond with their level of agreement to the same statements after taking the course. They rated their responses on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree” (Table 2). Statistical analysis of these results using a t test indicates a statistically significant “before-to-after” improvement for several of these responses (bold numbers in Table 2). By far the most significant improvements were observed from “I have an understanding of the different career options in chemistry” which increased by 1.05 (t = 7.60; p = 5.08 10 13) and “I have access to people with a variety of different careers in chemistry” which increased by 1.19 (t = 9.11; p = 2.04 10 17). Students were then asked to rate various aspects of the course with regards to the level of helpfulness in making career decisions. They rated their responses on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being “not at all helpful” and 5 being “extremely helpful” (Table 3). The highest rated aspects were “exposure to a variety of career opportunities in chemistry” (4.28) and “listening to career talks” (4.34). Further, when asked to select which aspect of CIC was most helpful, students overwhelmingly chose “exposure to a variety of career opportunities in chemistry” (39.6%) and “listening to career talks” (35.1%). In fact, of the eight students that selected “other” (6.0%), three said that both exposure to a variety of career opportunities in chemistry and listening to career talks were equally helpful. Students were next asked questions regarding the specific areas or topics that were covered throughout the course (see Table 1). When asked to select any areas or topics that they were previously unfamiliar with, the majority of the students selected “Intellectual Property” (55.7%) and “Chemistry to Politics” (50.8%). Additionally, more than a third of students were unfamiliar with working as a consultant (45.2%) or “Science and Activism” (34.4%). In fact, 43.3% of students said that one or 1377
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed1001366 |J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1376–1379
Journal of Chemical Education
ARTICLE
Table 2. Comparison of Student Responses before and after the CIC Course Before
After
Rating Averagea
Standard Deviation
Rating Averagea
Standard Deviation
I am motivated to complete my current degree.
4.13
1.32
4.25
1.28
I am planning to pursue a career in chemistry.
4.01
1.33
4.09
1.32
I am motivated to pursue a career in chemistry.
3.92
1.34
4.06
1.33
I have a specific career goal in mind.
3.24
1.23
3.63b
1.18
I know what I need to do to obtain the career that I want.
3.19
1.25
3.71b
1.24
I understand the importance of career advice.
3.71
1.27
4.17b
1.14
I have an understanding of the different career options in chemistry.
2.95
1.09
4.00b
1.15
I have access to people with a variety of different careers in chemistry.
2.50
1.06
3.69b
1.07
Statement
Ratings on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”. b Values displayed in bold indicate a statistically significant increase from before-to-after. a
Table 3. Aspects of the CIC Course Helpful to Students in Making Career Decisions Answer Options
Rating Averagea
Standard Deviation
Most Helpfulb
Exposure to a variety of career opportunities in chemistry Listening to research talks
4.28 3.53
1.15 1.45
39.6 6.0
Listening to career talks
4.34
0.90
35.1
Meeting in small groups with the speakers
3.93
1.33
13.4
Overall course
4.05
1.19
—
a Ratings on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being “not at all helpful” and 5 being “extremely helpful”. b Percentage of students rating that aspect of the course as “most helpful” (6.0% selected “other”).
more of the speakers caused them to contemplate a career option they had not previously considered. Comments indicate that, in many cases, students found a talk so interesting or inspirational that they became open to a new career they were previously aware of but had not seriously contemplated. When asked if they agreed with the statement “a good breadth of careers were covered”, the student rating average was 3.78 (on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”). Students suggested a variety of topics or areas related to their specific interests as examples of types of speakers of whom they would like to have seen more. However, two of the most common suggestions were for more speakers without a Ph.D., and for more speakers from nonresearch-based careers. Students were also asked if they agreed with the statement “This course came at a good time in my studies”. Although the rating average for the level of agreement with this statement was 3.36 (on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree”), comments indicated mixed opinions about the optimal year CIC should be offered. Several undergraduate students commented that the course would have been helpful to them earlier in their career (in the first two undergraduate years) when they were trying to decide whether to major in chemistry. Historically, CIC is limited to upper-level undergraduate students because lower-level students do not have the chemistry background to benefit from the research talk. However, one strategy to consider is to add a “first-year seminar” that could be integrated into the current course by requiring firstyear students to only attend the career portion of the talk. A similar first-year course has been reported at Northeast Missouri State University with a major goal of familiarizing students with opportunities in and requirements for a career in chemistry.9 Graduate students however, tended to feel that the course would have been more helpful later in their careers. Many commented
that taking CIC during their first year was challenging considering their other responsibilities. The few students who said they would not take CIC again commented that they would like to sit in on a few select talks. This statement is supported by the fact that few upper-level graduate students enroll in the course, but several are in attendance at each talk. Finally, students were asked for their overall impressions of CIC. Students agreed (81.3%) that the course provided them with opportunities to make contacts (network) with chemists and would recommend (91.8%) the course to future students. When asked to comment about the course, several students mentioned that they would have benefited more from a longer career talk and a shorter research talk. This is supported by student rankings of which aspect of the course was most helpful (35.1% said listening to career talks was most helpful, whereas only 6.0% of students rated the research talks as most helpful) as shown in Table 3. Further, several students mentioned that they would have preferred slightly shorter talk times, and more time for questions or networking. Additionally, some students suggested that general career assistance (resume and CV writing, interviewing, etc.) would have been beneficial. Selected student comments included the following: This course opened my eyes to a broader range of careers in chemistry. I realize now that my degree has value in many different fields outside of academia and industry. This course is an absolutely invaluable resource for undergraduates who are entering the field of chemistry. We have never been briefed or exposed to the world of chemistry in this manner of grand detail before. I understand what I need to do to get where I want now, and I have the motivation to do so. I would recommend this class to other students because the course helped me open my eye[s] to see that one can do 1378
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed1001366 |J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1376–1379
Journal of Chemical Education anything with chemistry. I was a person who did not know what the hell I wanted to do after I graduated college with chemistry. In addition, I was a person who did not know about connections and networking. From taking this class, I now have a better sense of what direction I want to go. From the lecturers, I have an idea of what I need to do in order to become as successful and HAPPY as the lecturers. This class helps you make connections early in your career for future endeavors. If this class does not show you a career [that] you end up thinking of pursuing, it will give you some inspiration in how you want to work to obtain the career you end up with. The speakers all had inspirational stories that make [sic] me have a new focus on my school work. Learning about the variety of careers in chemistry and about specific [career fields] has open[ed] my eyes to a new path I can take with chemistry. I do not think that I would [have] even looked at a different path, if I didn’t take this class.
ARTICLE
(9) Dunn, J. G.; Kagi, R. I.; Phillips, D. N. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 1313–1316. (10) Belloli, R. C. J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62, 333–334. (11) American Chemical Society. What Chemists Do. http://portal. acs.org/portal/PublicWebSite/careers/whatchemistsdo/index.htm. (accessed Jun 2011). (12) The survey was conducted online at http://www.surveymonkey.com (accessed Jun 2011). (13) Graduate students tend to enroll in CIC during their first year to fulfill enrollment requirements.
’ CONCLUSIONS The survey results suggest that the Careers in Chemistry course greatly increased student understanding of the variety of career options available to chemists. Additionally, it provided students with access to people with a variety of different careers in chemistry and opportunities to network with chemists. Students found that general exposure to the spectrum of career opportunities in chemistry and listening to career talks were the most helpful aspects of the course, and the vast majority of students would recommend CIC to future students. These results imply that implementation of a similar course or seminar series at other institutions may be beneficial to increasing student awareness of career options in chemistry. ’ ASSOCIATED CONTENT
bS
Supporting Information Summary of the survey results, statistical data, and a sample schedule for a visiting CIC speaker. This material is available via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.
’ AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected] ’ ACKNOWLEDGMENT We thank all of the Careers in Chemistry invited speakers for their advice and feedback on this article as well as the Careers in Chemistry classes of 2009 and 2010 for their participation in our survey. ’ REFERENCES (1) Lent, R. W.; Larkin, K. C.; Hasegawa, C. S. Voc. Guid. Q. 1986, 34, 151–159. (2) Mazlo, J.; Kelter, P. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1175–1177. (3) Mabrouk, P. A. J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78, 1628–1631. (4) Orazem, M. E.; Shah, D. O. Chem. Eng. Educ. 1990, 24, 124–129. (5) Harrison, A. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 659–660. (6) Ordman, A. B. J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 753. (7) Miller, W. M.; Petrich, M. A. Chem. Eng. Educ. 1991, 25, 134–139. (8) Delaware, D. L.; Freeman, R. G.; Moody, A. E.; Van Galen, D. J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 144–146. 1379
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed1001366 |J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 1376–1379
